indianajonesfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Category: Professors - and non-professor scholars...
So, as we've been adding characters, i'm thinking about the Category:Professors - it was originally designed for those with actual professor positions at universities and colleges, but what about other characters whose jobs are similarly scholarly (research, preservation) but are not actually Professors. should we include them (and thus perhaps rename the Category to Professors and Scholars), or should we make a separate category for Academics (this would mostly include Museum-connected academics, like Marcus and Eduardo, as well as scholars not associated with a school, like Matthius. The key difference i suppose is that Professors are generally considered to have teaching duties, while other academics may be only interested in research (and publication). What do you think? *One category for all eggheads, *Two categories: Professors , Scholars... *or should Academics be broken out into their fields: Antiquarians (Museum staff, typically), Historians, etc., and Professor is an overlay profession (if they are known to have that title at a college or university) that is also used. thus Henry Jones would be both a Historian and Professor. Jawajames 18:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC) *Perhaps the way to go would be to have an overarching "Scholars" category, with "Professors" as a subcategory (and possibly the other academics as subcategories as well, if the number of articles warrants it)? jSarek 07:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC) **an interesting idea, though the number of Professors would likely outnumber those who are just scholars. also, some Professors might not really be 'scholars' in the liberal arts sense, if they are in other fields like science (like Goddard who would be a professor and a scientist).. or are all Professors by default a scholar? hmm.. perhaps if we had Scholars, which had a few people, and two sub categories: Professors, and Museum Curators (since most of the non-professor scholars are Museum-connected). most people would fall into either of the subcategories, or even both, and a few would just be scholars.. or is it too much? Jawajames 09:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC) ***Hmm. I don't think it would be too much, at least not currently, but it leads to the question of what to do with some of our other related categories - we also have Category:Educators, Category:Scientists & Engineers, and Category:Archaeologists. Should we put them all in a "Scholars" category, or just create a "Museum curators" category under Category:Characters by Profession and be done with it? jSarek 10:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC) ****Got it: Thinking of these overlaps in a grid format: one axis is by field of study (Archaeologists, Historians, Scientists, etc.), and the other axis is their role (Professor, Museum Curator, neither)). Some people, like Henry Jones Sr would fit on the grid as Historian / Professor, but others would lie off the grid like Matthius would be a Historian but neither professor nor museum curator. i'm not sure we would need a super-category (proposed Scholars, above). so all we really need to do is create Historians (which would include most antiquarians), and Museum Curators, and start tagging ppl. what do you think? Jawajames 00:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC) *****I think that's probably the way to go. jSarek 08:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC) *Ok: We have Category:Historians and Category:Museum Staff, and i've started tagging people for these categories. there are a few people still listed under Category:Professors that probably shouldn't be there (non-professors who are also not historians nor museum staff -- scholars, some of which are in the fields of linguistics & anthropology - hmm a future category there) Jawajames 23:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)